1. Read the subpoena from provided path.
2. Classify (third-party-docs / third-party-depo / party / CID / grand-jury).
3. If grand jury → stop, escalate per

   ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md

   . Otherwise continue.
4. Load

   ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/matters/_log.yaml

   for cross-check. Load

   ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md

   → landscape, privilege conventions, escalation norms.
5. Follow the workflow and reference below.
6. Extract key fields, analyze scope/burden/privilege, produce objections framework + compliance plan + deadline calendar.
7. Write

   ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/inbound/[slug]/triage.md

   . Copy or link subpoena to

   ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/inbound/[slug]/incoming.[ext]

   .
8. Hand off:

   /legal-hold --issue

   if hold not in place;

   /matter-intake

   if materiality warrants;

   /matter-briefing [slug]

   if party subpoena in existing matter.

• The subpoena document (user provides path or drops it in-session)

• ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/matters/_log.yaml

  — for related matter lookup and legal hold status

• ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md

  → landscape (regulators we deal with), house privilege conventions, escalation norms

• Third-party document subpoena (civil) — we're not a party to the litigation; someone wants our documents. Usual objection categories: relevance, burden, privilege, place-of-compliance / geographic reach.
• Third-party deposition subpoena — someone wants an employee to testify. Scope, relevance, burden; possible motion to quash; witness prep required.
• Party subpoena — we ARE a party; this is discovery in a litigation we're tracking. Treat as discovery, not inbound — it should map to an existing matter.
• Regulatory civil investigative demand (CID) — FTC, SEC, DOJ, state AG. Different rules, different posture; often more deferential but also more consequential.
• Grand jury subpoena — criminal. Escalate immediately to criminal counsel; different skill path (outside this skill's scope — flag for escalation).

• Issuing authority — court (which), agency (which), counsel (if civil)
• Issuing party — who requested (if civil)
• Case / matter caption — the litigation we're being asked about
• Document categories sought — numbered list
• Testimony topics (if depo) — Rule 30(b)(6) designations
• Deadline for response/objection — date served + computing the response window per applicable rule
• Production date — date by which documents must be produced
• Geographic scope — custodians, locations, systems implicated
• Custodian of record designation — who at the company is the witness/signatory

• Party subpoena → related to existing matter: verify the caption matches a matter in

  _log.yaml

  . If yes, route to that matter's workflow; this triage is informational.
• Third-party subpoena → caption we don't recognize: capture the parties; log as standalone inbound.
• Multiple subpoenas from same case: flag coordinated issuance; a single response strategy may apply.

• Do the categories map to actual documents we plausibly have?
• Is any category a fishing expedition (overbroad, untethered to claims/defenses of the underlying case)?
• Place of compliance / geographic reach — apply the researched rule; limits differ by subpoena type (trial vs. document vs. deposition).

• Custodians implicated, systems searched, time period
• Estimated volume (rough: small / medium / large / extreme)
• Cost — third-party responders may have cost-shifting available; check the researched rule.

• Attorney-client or work product likely implicated? (Almost always yes for anything legal-related; often yes for communications involving in-house or outside counsel.)
• Other privileges — trade secret, HIPAA (if applicable), state privilege, common interest
• Privilege log will be required — flag the format per

  ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md

• Confidentiality — protective order needed?
• Duplicative — do they already have this from another party?
• Not possessed — we don't have what they're asking for (document with specificity)
• Improperly served — check the researched rule's service requirements

• Legal basis — cite the pinpoint from the rule researched in Step 0
• Specific application to this subpoena (which categories, which custodians)
• Strength (strong / reasonable / weak)

• Scope of likely production — after objections, what we'd produce
• Custodians to search — names and systems
• Date range
• Review protocol — who reviews for privilege (us, outside counsel, contract reviewers)
• Production format — per the subpoena or per negotiated protocol (TIFF+load file, native, PDF)
• Privilege log requirements — format, fields

• Response deadline — per researched rule; note if user needs more time (meet-and-confer to extend is standard)
• Objection deadline — per researched rule (federal / state rule + any local variant)
• Production date — if no objections succeed
• Motion to quash window — if pursuing that path, timing is critical

NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR OUTSIDE COUNSEL. This is a structured classification and scoping read to support fast decisions on deadlines, holds, and engagement. Every rule reference is a starting-point heuristic; jurisdiction-specific analysis, objections finalization, motions practice, and merit calls on privilege require licensed counsel familiar with the forum. Engage outside counsel for any subpoena above routine third-party document scope.

• Issuing authority: [court/agency]
• Issuing party: [name]
• Case caption: [caption]
• Response deadline: [date]
• Production date: [date]
• Motion-to-quash window: [date range]

• Scope of likely production: [after objections]
• Custodians / systems: [list]
• Date range: [range]
• Review protocol: [who, how]
• Production format: [format]
• Privilege log: [format, est. entries]

[SME VERIFY]

• Response deadline: [date]

  [SME VERIFY]

• Objection deadline: [date] — cite: [rule + pinpoint]

  [SME VERIFY]

• Meet-and-confer by: [date] (typically before objection deadline)

  [SME VERIFY]

• Production date: [date]

• Legal hold issued — [yes/no] — if no, run

  /legal-hold [slug] --issue

  with subpoena scope
• Outside counsel engaged — [yes/who/TBD]
• Meet-and-confer scheduled — [date]
• Matter created in log — [yes/no/TBD — usually yes for anything above the smallest third-party docs subpoena]
• Insurance / cost-shifting analysis — [if burden is large]
• Internal escalation — [who]

## Who's using this

~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md

Responding to a subpoena has legal consequences — missing a deadline risks contempt, over-producing waives privilege, under-producing risks sanctions. Have you reviewed this with an attorney? If yes, proceed. If no, here's a brief to bring to them:

[Generate a 1-page summary: the subpoena type, issuing authority, deadlines, scope of what's sought, objections framework and strength, privilege and burden issues, proposed response posture, what could go wrong, what to ask the attorney.]

If you need to find a licensed attorney, solicitor, barrister, or other authorised legal professional in your jurisdiction: your professional regulator's referral service is the fastest starting point (state bar in the US, SRA/Bar Standards Board in England & Wales, Law Society in Scotland/NI/Ireland/Canada/Australia, or your jurisdiction's equivalent).

• If classified as grand jury subpoena → stop, flag for escalation per

  ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md

  , do not proceed with standard triage.
• If classified as CID: flag that regulator-specific norms apply; recommend outside regulatory counsel.
• Otherwise: offer to create a matter (usually yes — subpoenas are almost always material enough to track).
• If a legal hold isn't issued with subpoena scope, hand off to

  /legal-hold --issue

  immediately.

• Draft the final objections letter. Produces the framework; the letter is drafted by user + outside counsel (future: a dedicated objections-draft skill).
• Move to quash. Surfaces the option; the motion is legal work that requires jurisdiction-specific analysis.
• Validate rules across jurisdictions. The Step 0 research produces the operative rule for this subpoena; the skill doesn't independently confirm currency or local variants. Flag for counsel verification before acting.
• Handle grand jury subpoenas. Escalates. This is outside the triage scope.